Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

CWmike writes "With HP spinning off its PC business, rivals will be looking for a way to get a bigger piece of the hardware pie. HP's PC unit news, among other industry-rattling announcements, including pulling out of the tablet market and shuttering webOS, rocked the hardware industry since HP is by far the dominant maker in the world. So while HP decides what to do, rivals should be plotting their next move, say industry analysts. Who could benefit the most from any change-up in PC sales? The obvious suspects: Dell, which passed Acer in the second quarter of this year; and Acer is looking to make up some lost ground and could see HP's shake up as an opportunity. And don't forget Lenovo, which holds the third-largest market share. Despite the general downshift for PCs, Lenovo is riding some great momentum right now, reports Gartner. In the second quarter of 2011, the company saw 22.5% growth in its PC shipments."
A related article ponders the fate of webOS, looking at a number of potential buyers as well as the unlikely possibility that HP will open source it.

So what you're saying is the only thing of value in WebOS and Android is the Linux kernel?

No, the patches to allow the linux kernel to run on a phone, for example, are of value - they're also available for download, as are all the other patches.

As far as the WebOS UI - UIs come, UIs go, and for many people a gesture-based interface doesn't work on a desktop (which is where HP wanted to extend it). Gesture-based interfaces that don't have non-gesture alternatives for all actions also violate both access

It's a laptop masquerading as a tablet. It's bulky and not terribly pretty and it runs windows. It has nothing people would want from a tablet. A tablet isn't meant to be a laptop replacement so a laptop wanting to a tablet is lame. PC manufacturers need to quit being cheap and actually work on their designs more then maybe they can make things people will buy.

PC manufacturers, now who are your talking about, surely not the system badgers, the only thing they design being, the badges on the outside of computers. Could you be possibly talking about the ODM, joking called other devices manufacturers, those companies that actually manufacture PCs but whom the public relations bull shit caimpagn try to make invisible in order to trade on the prior trust built by one was computer manufacturers before they got taken over by off shoring shit heads (there just ain't no

I'm sure it's filled your needs but you're not the majority. I don't like tablets and don't own one. The closest thing have is an EEE 901 netbook but it's not a tablet mainly because I don't want one. Your 'macbois' comment is laughable seeing how I'm watching Dr. Strangelove on my Lenovo running Ubuntu. Just because I acknowledge the fact that Apple leads in aesthetics and most PC manufacturers consistently fail at it doesn't mean I'm some sort of mac fanboy.

Close... But I'd say companies like TigerDirect, Newegg, Amazon, Fry's, Tech4Less, etc. will actually start building to order. They've already got the cases, motherboards, etc. in stock... Assembling a PC really isn't the hardest job either. The parts manufacturers have done a good job of idiot-proofing that. Most of the internals can't be any worse than what the typical "PC maker" offers anyways. When it comes to boards Foxconn, Gigabyte, ASUS, etc. are pretty much what's on the inside in any case.

Uhhh...where you been AC? Tigerdirect ALREADY does that, they have their own brand called SystemMax. Still not as cheap as you can DIY, but for those that don't want to take the whole 30 minutes to put the thing together it is cheaper than most.

But good luck on the laptop thing, as the OEMs like Dell have found the easiest way to make people constantly buy new machines is to ass rape them on parts. The OEM laptop are nothing but proprietary in a plastic case and damned near nothing is interchangeable. I don

If they sell of their computer business what do they think they can sell?

"Personal computer business" != "computer business". Their Q3 2011 financial review [corporate-ir.net] indicates that, in earnings from operations in the quarter ending July 31, 2011, the rest of the computer business - "Enterprise Servers, Storage and Networking" - was third, after the services business and the printer/scanner business, and ahead of the PC business.

That explains why IBM is out of business, unless you think that servers and POS are carrying all the load.

Right... but for the last few years HP has claimed it's competing with IBM Global Services, but I don't see much real evidence of that. And I don't see HP making a lot of software either... IBM has the DB2 and WebSphere product lines (sales of which are driven by their Global Services contracts). I don't know if IBM's hardware outsells HP's, but they have a lot of products available there, too, and they cost money.

But then again, although I have two consumer-market HP PCs here in my office, I'd categorize the tower as "average to meh" and the laptop is pretty much junk. I'd love to see HP clear some space in the retail channel if it means someone who actually knows how to make a decent PC takes their place.

You didn't say anything about the cost (and 3x the cost, come on, 1995 called and wants its myth back), you said (and I quote) "When they start making servers and pc's that natively run linux and windows then they can have a bigger piece of the pie."

So, that's right now then. Now you are trying to dig your way out of an ignorant post by trying to retcon in some nonsense about the price.

Yes, you pay a premium for Apple hardware, but that was not the argument at all.

I dislike Apple as much as the next guy, but be reasonable here - the Macbook Air is expensive because it is ultra light weight unlike the Dell. A Samsung that comes close to the specs of the Macbook is NP900X3A at $1650 and it is half the hard drive and a weaker processor. Take a look at the 3 lb models from others and the Macbook is probably in the upper middle price range ($1400, $1650, $1600, $1950 were the prices for such a laptop with even a $128 SSD on TigerDirect).

No you deliberately picked the most expensive MacBook Air which was made for ultra portability and then selected a generic Dell and said they were equal. That's like comparing a Prius and saying that it's equal to a Ford Focus and that the Prius is overpriced and you don't care about that gas mileage myth.

You are being so disingenuous, it is ridiculous. The fact that you have to be so disingenuous to pretend Dell is cheaper than Apple tells the whole story. Comparing a big fat notebook that most women cannot even carry day-in and day-out to the smallest i5 PC on the planet, with no moving parts, which can get lost in a purse, is just totally disingenuous. Plus you used the Dell base model but not the Apple base model. There is a MacBook Air that is 60% of the price of the one you chose.

Apple is 3x the price? You mean I can get an i5 ultralight with Thunderbolt, SSD, backlit keyboard, multitouch trackpad, made entirely from one block of aluminum for rigidity despite being only millimeters thin, for only $333 from a non-Apple vendor? Who would that be?

There are plenty of Windows users, even many developers, even people inside Microsoft, who use Apple hardware. If you want high-end hardware, the Mac is by far the cheapest and best. If you want a notebook that doesn't suck, the Mac is the onl

The first "rivals" hotlink didn't even mention Apple. And the "downshift" link mentioned only the iPad. But I'm guessing, Apple might get a bigger piece of the pie too.

Apple have limited themselves to selling hardware that runs their software. When they start making servers and pc's that natively run linux and windows then they can have a bigger piece of the pie.

As someone who have run the PowerPC flavors of Linux and several BSDs on Macs since long before they did the processor switch, I have to say that there is just so many ways in which your post is just wrong. And when it comes to new hardware I have no objection on their ability to run it "native", in fact I'm running Linux native on my MacBook Pro. I have no need for Windows but I can tell you that it works just as well.

Unless you can convince Apple to start making a way to run Autodesk Inventor products without having to go to the whole Boot Camp thing (aka double licensing on a single work station is not a smart option for manufacturing)....then no, they won't be 'replacing HP' as a hardware vendor.

Apple is barely even on the table let alone a significant piece of the pie. The Desktop/laptop business is jam packed with competition, especially in the enterprise desktop market. Margins are small and competition is fierce, apple rules supreme on the tablet front, but that part of HP's business is even tinier, hence why would the link bother to mention apple?

Margins are small and competition is fierce, apple rules supreme on the tablet front, but that part of HP's business is even tinier, hence why would the link bother to mention apple?

Because HP says [wsj.com] the fact people are increasingly ditching PC's for tablets (read: iPads) factored in their decision:

"The tablet effect is real, and sales of the TouchPad are not meeting our expectations," Apotheker says, explaining the movement of consumers from PCs to tablets as one of the problems with the PC division. So H-P is exploring options for its unit that "may include separation through spinoff or other transactions."

Basically they're saying iPads are where the money and future growth are and th

Because HP says [wsj.com] the fact people are increasingly ditching PC's for tablets (read: iPads) factored in their decision:

"The tablet effect is real, and sales of the TouchPad are not meeting our expectations," Apotheker says, explaining the movement of consumers from PCs to tablets as one of the problems with the PC division. So H-P is exploring options for its unit that "may include separation through spinoff or other transactions."

Basically they're saying iPads are where the money and future growth are and they failed to create even a beachhead in that market so they're getting out.

That seems like a very shortsighted move because HP only acquired Palm last year and has only had a competitor to the iPad on the market for a month and a half. To kill your largest division because your 1st generation tablet didn't make an immediate splash against a product from a company that has a cult-like following tells me that HP's management isn't willing to work to develop a product that they purchased just to enter this market, and they deserve to fail as a result.

Also, Dell and Lenovo may take HP's share of the corporate workstation market and Acer the low-to-mid range laptop but Apple will probably take a healthy bite out of the more profitable high end laptop share (what HP had left of it) and high end PC. The volume isn't really important, the fact that there isn't any money left in being top dog volume-wise is the whole reason they are getting out.

HP's PC's are only 1/3rd of their revenue, and they only get a 5% margin on that, and they have to ship an incredible number of systems just to make that. They could put that same money in T-bills and get 3% for couch sitting, right? They could buy Apple stock and get 10%, 20% return.

Microsoft takes the bulk of the profit from each PC sale. The game is up, though. Apotheker knows HP PSG is being played by Microsoft, because he is a software guy. So let Microsoft buy PSG and tie up that much revenue making W

Apple just became the #1 PC vendor by volume last quarter, shipping 4 million more systems than HP. They are also by far the most profitable PC maker, and they have grown faster than all the other PC vendors for more than 5 years now. Apotheker specifically said part of the reason for shuttering HP PSG is that they cannot compete with Apple. How that is "not sitting at the table" is beyond me.

Apple were already getting a piece of HP's PC business before they decided to sell it, so I think it is assumed that will only continue. Apple just became the largest PC vendor in the world by volume, shipping about 4 million more systems last quarter than HP. Those new Apple sales came mostly out of HP since it is the next biggest vendor.

That is really sad, I was eager to get a ProBook. Business grade hardware from HP was almost always really good, I'm sad to see it go.

HP make great high end workstations and great servers. Their laptops are not so good. The build quality on any probook I've seen are not up to lenovo's standards although I'll admit HP laptops look prettier.

Actually tell that to my last employer who brought a few hundred HP workstations, rack mounted them, and used them as servers. It was the cheapest way to buy good quality and high spec hardware at the time.

It's slashdot, I didn't actually read the article. Nice to know I'll still be able to buy decent servers.

ahh, but aren't we supposed to be all buying ARM 64-bit systems right now, in order to save power in those data centres, ehn? like the phytec module using the spear1310 where you can get 8 Dual-Core Cortex A9s with 1gb ECC DDR3 RAM on each, and 8 SATA drives (one each) which are the major power drain in the 19in 1U rack-mounted server? http://www.phytec.com/news/ZT-Systems-R1801e-Server.html [phytec.com]

Apotheker himself said it, and it is in many articles. But I guess by "press" maybe you mean PC-oriented press? I could see why PC Mag would downplay that.

Anyway, he was very clear that he is going to compete with Oracle and IBM, and not compete with Apple.

The thing is, most users right now want either a $499 iPad or a $999 MacBook Air, and only Apple makes those. There is not even a clone that is close. This hasn't happened before because Apple never had a low-end PC before, and Apple's form factors used t

It is their largest segment of their business. The market punished them today for it. It just isnt growing as fast as other segments. They want to say 'oh yeah 10% growth yoy' They have been following the market for many things instead of leading the way.

Instead of reinventing what they make they just threw the largest segment of their business overboard.

When IBM did it, it was not exactly a huge segment of their business at that point.

Instead of taking on Apple and Dell and Acer in making a better PC. They made mediocre/cheaper ones.

You're a bit fuzzy on your history there. HP made very high-quality PCs for several years, and then Dell and Gateway had their race to the bottom, and nobody would pay the difference to get higher quality machines. HP held out as long as they could, but the writing was on the wall.

HP PSG is only 33% of HP revenue and only generates a 5% margin. It is like a charity they run on behalf of Microsoft. Put that money in treasury bills and focus on better business opportunities and you are better off. Apotheker said "we have a lot of better ways of using that capital."

The Windows PC has already been "margin driven into the ground." That is why HP wants out. That is why Apple systems are at least a generation ahead at everything. Notebooks just got PCI-Express and it is Mac-only!

Yeah, erase all those years of RD, manufacturing know-how, engineering skills and general success in the PC scene. This is testament of utter executive disconnection, incompetence if not plain betrayal of the company, employees, HP's shareholders and loyal customers. Probably realising he can't compete with Steve Jobs, he cowardly axes the entire division so he doesn't need to personally deal with Apple's dominance and leadership.

These executives should realize that not everything is measured by profit margins, HP is a public company and PC division is a very important western PC maker. In the upcoming digital economy and computer based world we in the west would like to use western made computers to avoid hardware level spyware and other malignancies of squarely China made computers, HP plays an important role here. IBM already lost it, to our dismay, this is another western failure in the making.

That is BS. HP is not obligated to assemble millions of computers for Microsoft for a 5% return on investment like some kind of charity. If there is some duty to keep HP PSG alive, then let that duty fall on Microsoft, who are the only one who can turn a good profit on a Windows PC. Windows should move from coming on DVD to coming on flash storage inside an already functioning PC.

Apotheker is like, "I can get 5% return just by putting this money in the bank!"

With there 1-2+ year locks in and they reset when you get a new phone.Forced Voice plans at $5+ per line or $25+ on there ownForced Data plans at $20-$30 per Device for at most 5GB with more data being $10 per GBNO Data Plan poolsSoftware lock inApp store lock inforced carrier software on the phone

I can't imagine HP are just going to say "OK, all you engineers and technicians; you're out of work. And we will scrap all the tools, demolish the factories, salt the fields...."
They are probably going to create a seperate company, and give it a suitable name to deferentiate it from themselves. Hmm. Maybe even call it Compaq. Not sure they would choose DEC:)
Existing HP customers could then be shifted over to Compaq, without any significant change.
Cambo

First, notably, a lot of the financial commentators are praising the dump of PSG because of the relatively weak ~5% margin. It is clear that a lot of the vocal members of that circle tear into the numbers piece by piece without consideration of how it relates to the whole. For example, dumping PSG means a lot of big contracts (like the NASA deal they were touting so heavily not so long ago) are going to be at high risk for cancellation. That means not only are they losing the PC piece of that pie, it means they are forfeiting some amount of server sales. The ability to sell all a company's IT needs from datacenter to desktop was actually a non-trivial advantage over IBM for a lot of procurement situations, this means they will forfeit that advantage going forward and lose server sales. There is also the reputation damage associated with companies that bet their business on the consistency of HP to potentially lose the bet. This last part will depend heavily upon how they handle existing contracts and make things right. Another consequence is on HP buying components. When you ship a whole lot of PCs, component vendors will be aggressive on margin and make it up in volume. If you are ordering only parts for servers, expect a hit to server base material cost due to lower purchase volumes. This applies to common components, but more critically distinct components sourced from the same suppliers even if they wouldn't fit in a laptop.

The whole palm acquisition handling demonstrated a complete lack of strategic direction, regardless of your opinion of WebOS. Either there was no market opportunity in the first place, meaning HP bet a couple billion based on poor marketing skills, Palm's team was a lost cause from the start, which HP should have figured out before the 1.2 billion dollar check, whatever capability was there was destroyed by HP mismanagement, or it would've worked but they canned it before even really trying. Of course, it's a combination of all of the above, but I do recall a mass exodus of nearly every single 'visionary' person who could take credit for the features about WebOS that garnered any praise, meaning HP either booted them out or at least failed to retain them, which reeks of mismanagement. Launching after the iPad2 at price parity with 0 mind share was absolutely insane.

Another thought I have is around their declared intent to move to software and services instead of PC industry. A lot of people describe this as IBM like, but IBM was *very* firmly entrenched in the software industry before they exited. HP is not nearly so robust in the software industry, and while they may be making moves in the name of getting there, they should be hedging their bets before betting those efforts will bear fruit. I do wonder if the Apotheker leadership is a bit biased from his SAP experience and assuming the answer to any company regardless of current positioning just just become a software development company. I wouldn't be surprised to see the guy handed CEO of McDonald's and tell them to shutter their fast food business and start coding.

In general, they lost 20% of their company value because 1 year ago, they said 'we want to be just like apple' and threw billions at the problem to say in only one year "we want to be nothing at all like apple". They've been showing more and more shortsightedness in their spending in the last couple of years, spending on the magnitude that demands long-term engagement and then changing their minds on short-term timescales.

> The ability to sell all a company's IT needs from datacenter to desktop was> actually a non-trivial advantage over IBM for a lot of procurement situations,> this means they will forfeit that advantage going forward and lose server sales.

As long as the master vendor takes ownership of the commodity product (specs, warranty, service, etc) does it matter what the name is on the box? Historically IBM would (re)sell you almost anything except Amdahl, and I have purchased plenty of non-IBM stuff from

After a lot of time in the 'enterprise' space, I'm about convinced they have a requirement of 'software must be crappy' before they'll ever consider buying it. Show them a straightforward, robust piece of software that can be managed by one or two people and a massive mess of software that requires a matrix-managed team of operators from a few dozen departments... They'll go for the latter almost every time.

The desktop to datacenter thing is obsolete. Today, you want mobile to data center. People don't want huge, complicated, power hungry, high maintenance needing, high software license fee HP PC's as clients. They want iPads, they want iPhones, they want ultralights like MacBook Air. HP did not learn to build those kinds of clients, so they cannot offer an all-HP solution. So they are a server company.

Even Apple's tiny Mac mini is often used as a server today. The clients are wireless. Servers are separated f

...but I have a sneaky suspicion there's more to it than this. Yes, Apotheker is a CEO, and as much as we all like to look condescendingly upon those in upper management as being out of touch, HP has been trading Dell for the #1 and #2 slots as far as PC shipment numbers for the past decade. I find it seriously difficult to believe that the board, the shareholders, or even the 'yes men' will say "dump the second most profitable division of our company, excellent idea, sir!".

HP PSG only has 5% margins. That is only slightly more profitable than Treasury bills. Apotheker said, "we have better ways of using that capital." Making PC's for Microsoft is not a good business and never has been. It is refreshing to hear someone at HP talk who is not a Microsoft-brainwashed zombie.

Apple just became the #1 PC vendor by volume last quarter. They shipped 4 million more systems than HP.

> but I'd dare say that there has to be more to this story than simply a change of heart> whereby th

Same here. HP provides our servers, printers, desktops and laptops. And an HP support contract for all that. Eliminating PCs is taking a leg off the stool. Our office will probably shift back to Dell would be my guess.